Supreme Court hears challenges to UGC’s new rules today
A bench led by CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi will hear UGC regulation challenges today.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to hear a series of petitions on Thursday challenging the University Grants Commission’s (UGC) recently notified “Promotion of Equity in Higher Education Institutions” Regulations, 2026. The case has drawn attention nationwide because it touches on sensitive issues of fairness, equality, and access to grievance redressal in India’s higher education system.
According to the cause list published on the apex court’s website, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi will take up the matter for hearing later in the day. Earlier, on Wednesday, the CJI had agreed to urgently list a plea challenging these regulations after the matter was mentioned in court. He assured the petitioner’s counsel that the case would be heard once any procedural defects in the petition were rectified.
“We know what’s happening. Make sure defects are cured.
The petitions argue that the UGC’s Equity Regulations could lead to discrimination against individuals in the general category. The petitioners have expressed concern that the regulations, while aiming to promote social justice, deny effective grievance redressal mechanisms to persons who do not fall under Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), or Other Backward Classes (OBC). In other words, the framework could institutionalize a form of exclusion by legally recognizing “victimhood” only for certain reserved categories, leaving general or upper-caste individuals without recourse even if they face discrimination.
According to the petitions, the regulations restrict the scope of “caste-based discrimination” exclusively to members of SCs, STs, and OBCs. This, the petitioners argue, creates an inequitable legal framework in which the rights of general category students and faculty may be overlooked, regardless of the context or severity of the discrimination they experience. The regulations, as framed, do not extend protections or grievance mechanisms to these groups, potentially leaving them without any institutional support or recourse.
The pleas seek a directive from the Supreme Court to ensure that Equal Opportunity Centres, Equity Helplines, inquiry mechanisms, and Ombudsperson proceedings under the regulations are available in a caste-neutral and non-discriminatory manner. The petitioners argue that these mechanisms, if restricted to specific social categories, amount to impermissible state-sanctioned discrimination and violate fundamental constitutional rights.
Citing Articles 14, 15(1), and 21 of the Constitution, the petitions emphasize that denying access to grievance redressal on the basis of caste identity is a violation of the principles of equality, non-discrimination, and fair access to remedies. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law, Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on grounds including caste, and Article 21 ensures the protection of life and personal liberty—which the petitioners argue encompasses the right to fair and accessible institutional grievance mechanisms.
The Supreme Court’s scrutiny of the UGC regulations is likely to examine both the spirit and the letter of the rules. While the government’s stated objective is to promote equity and inclusion in higher education, the challenge raises the critical question of whether this objective can be pursued without inadvertently creating exclusions or inequities for other groups.
The debate is particularly significant because higher education institutions in India serve as gateways not only to academic advancement but also to social mobility and career opportunities. A framework that limits grievance redressal to only certain categories could inadvertently undermine the broader principles of fairness and institutional accountability, which the UGC itself is meant to uphold.
The petitions argue that educational equity should not come at the cost of creating new hierarchies or denying justice to those outside reserved categories. They seek the Court’s guidance on ensuring that mechanisms such as Ombudsperson proceedings, inquiry committees, and helplines operate in an inclusive, caste-neutral manner while the government reconsiders or amends the regulations.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear these petitions, stakeholders across the country—students, faculty, legal experts, and policymakers—are watching closely. The case will test how India’s legal and institutional frameworks balance affirmative action with the principle of non-discrimination, a balance that is central to both constitutional law and the country’s vision for inclusive higher education.
The outcome could set important precedents for how higher education institutions implement equity initiatives, how grievance mechanisms are structured, and how the law interprets fairness and equality in educational governance. For many, the hearing represents not just a legal proceeding, but a larger conversation about inclusion, access, and justice in India’s rapidly evolving educational landscape.